globemaster corridor specific plan: new specific plan for
TRANSCRIPT
Globemaster Corridor Specific Plan: New Specific Plan for C-17 Site and Surroundings
City Council Application No. 1712-05
May 18, 2021
1
Globemaster Corridor Specific Plan and EIR/EIS
2
Recent Actions
3
• Planning Commissiono Held public hearing on December 12, 2020, and forwarded the project to the City Council with a
recommendation of approval
• Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC)o Held public hearing on March 3, 2021, and found the plan consistent with the County’s Airport
Land Use Plan (ALUP)o This step was required to take place between Planning Commission and City Council
• City Council approval is the final step in the process to enact this Specific Plan
Background
4
• Peak employment over 5,000 jobs.
• 1,158 direct Boeing jobs.
• 3,781 related supply chain jobs.
• City received Department of Defense (DoD) grant in 2015.
• Grant is to prepare C-17 Transition Master Plan.
• Major economic investment currently taking place in this area. The Specific Plan will help ensure job growth and success of efforts to reuse the Boeing property.
Economic Development
Planning
Land Use and Infrastructure
Planning
To adjust to the impacts from C-17
closure and identify opportunities to advance the site, the supply chain, and the regional
cluster
To prepare a Specific Plan to align with future economic
development strategies
To establish a dislocated worker
tracking platform that incorporates custom training modules and
assistance to impacted suppliers
Assistance to Impacted Defense Firms and Workers
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
What is a Specific Plan?
5
• Customized zoning established in State Planning and Zoning Law
• Guiding vision, quality design, and flexibility
• Development standards and design guidelines
• Allows the City to compete for grant funds and access development streamlining rules
Background: Space Beach
6
• 24 aerospace manufacturing, engineering and design companies based in Long Beach
• 6,500 direct jobs (as of January 2020)
• Most recent companies to select Long Beach to be their home for their corporate headquarters and advanced manufacturing facilities: Virgin Orbit, RocketLab, Relativity Space, SpinLaunch, Morf3D, SpaceX
• Located throughout the City but generally in the vicinity of the airport and Douglas Park
• Globemaster Specific Plan creates the opportunity to reinforce and expand this cluster
• Capitalize on agglomeration effect and area connections to local, regional and global transportation
Specific Plan Boundary and Statistics
7
• 437 acres total
• Centered on former C-17 manufacturing facility
• West side of the Long Beach Airport
• Cherry Avenue is north-south axis; Spring Street is east-west axis
• Encompassed within Long Beach boundaries, but abuts Signal Hill and Lakewood
Vision and Goals
8
• Create a 21st Century employment district that fosters innovation
• Stimulate economic development and job growth
• Cultivate the existing human capital of Long Beach
• Establish Cherry Avenue as a multi-modal unifying corridor
• Increase mobility choices with emphasis on vehicle trip reduction and active transportation
Land Use Plan
9
• Six land use districts:o Business Park (BP)o Community Commercial
(CC)o Industrial Commercial (IC)o General Industrial (IG)o Open Space (OS)o Airport (AP)
• Two overlays:o Cherry Avenue Overlay
Zoneo Airport Environs Overlay
Zone▪ AEOZ covers entire plan area
and enhances FAA and related compliance.
Plan Areas
10
Four geographic plan areas:• Northern: Auto-Oriented Commercial and Light Industrial
• Central Core: Business Park, General Industrial, Support Businesses, and Airport
• Southern Area: General Industrial, Commercial retail/office, and Open Space
• Southeastern Area: General Industrial, Airport
Outreach
11
• Phase I – Economic Development Planning (previous phase)
o Market analysis
o Stakeholder identification
o Public Opinion Survey
o Three public meetings – July, August, September 2016
• Phase II – Specific Plan (current phase)
o Three public workshops for Specific Plan development
• February 2018
• June 2018
• September 2018
o EIR/EIS scoping meeting
Outreach – What we heard
12
• Provide pedestrian-oriented retail amenities
• Improve safety and appearance of streets
• Enhance outdoor atmosphere
• Allow flexibility in permitted uses and standards
• Protect existing businesses
• Ensure sufficient parking
• Improve transit service and bicycle continuity
• Involve local residents and younger demographic
• Other concerns: traffic, historic resources, stormwater runoff
Overview of the CEQA/NEPA Process
13
PUBLIC AND AGENCY REVIEWOF DRAFT PROGRAM EIR/EIS (45 DAYS)
AUGUST 3, 2020 TO SEPTEMBER 17, 2020
PREPARE INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
PREPARE/DISTRIBUTENOTICE OF PREPARATION (30 DAYS)
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018 TO OCTOBER 11, 2018
SCOPING MEETINGSEPTEMBER 26, 2018
PREPARE DRAFT PROGRAM EIR/EIS
PREPARE FINAL EIR/EIS INCLUDINGRESPONSE TO COMMENTS
SEPTEMBER 18, 2020 TO NOVEMBER 30, 2020
ISSUE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
CITY COUNCILHEARING
MAY 18, 2021
DISTRIBUTED FINAL PROGRAM EIR/EIS TO COMMENTING AGENCIES
DECEMBER 1, 2020
PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
DECEMBER 17, 2020
Issues Analyzed in the Draft Program EIR/EIS
14
• Aesthetics• Air Quality• Cultural Resources• Greenhouse Gas Emissions• Hazards and Hazardous
Materials• Hydrology and Water Quality• Land Use and Planning• Noise
• Population and Housing• Public Services• Transportation• Tribal Cultural Resources• Utilities and Service Systems• Environmental Justice• Energy
CEQA/NEPA
• Aesthetics: Light and Glare
• Air Quality: Other Emissions
• Cultural Resources: Archeological Resources and Human Remains, Cumulative Cultural Resources Impacts
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal and Hazardous Upset/Accident; Listed Hazardous Site, Cumulative Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts
• Hydrology and Water Quality: Water Quality Standards, Groundwater Supplies, Erosion, Surface Runoff, Stormwater Drainage System Capacity, Cumulative Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts
• Noise: Ambient Noise Levels, Groundborne Vibration or Noise, Airport Land Use Plan, Cumulative Noise Impacts
• Tribal Cultural Resources: Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, Cumulative Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts
• Utilities and Service Systems: Relocation or Construction of New or Expanded Facilities, Cumulative Utilities and Service Systems Impacts
Issues Found to be Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated
15
CEQA/NEPA
• Air Quality: Air Quality Plan, Criteria Air Pollutants, Sensitive Receptors, Cumulative Air Quality Impacts
• Cultural Resources: Historical Resources
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions: GHG Emissions; GHG Reduction Plan, Policy, Regulations; Cumulative GHG Emissions Impacts
• Transportation: Circulation Plan, Ordinance, Policy; Cumulative Transportation Impacts
Issues Found to be Significant and Unavoidable with Mitigation Incorporated
16
CEQA/NEPA
• Alternative 1: No Project Alternativeo Would not meet project objectives
• Alternative 2: Reduced Project Alternativeo Environmentally Superior Alternative
o Reduces the significant and unavoidable environmental impacts; however, impacts related to air quality, cultural resources, and GHG emissions, and transportation would remain significant and unavoidable
o Would meet some of the identified project objectives, it would fail to meet those objectives as fully as the Proposed Project. The Reduced Project Alternative, would not meet or only partially meet the following objective:
• Stimulate Economic Development and Job Growth
Alternatives Considered in the Draft Program EIR/EIS
17
CEQA/NEPA
• Eight agency comments received, no comments from public
• Commenting Agencies: The following agencies submitted comment letters on the Draft Program EIR/EIS. Responses to each comment letter were provided in the Final Program EIR/EIS, a copy of which was sent to each of the commenting agencies a minimum of 10 days prior (December 1, 2020) to the Planning Commission hearing on December 17, 2020.o Los Angeles County Sanitation District, Facilities Planning
o Metropolitan Water District, Environmental Planning Section
o County of Los Angeles Airport Land Use Commission
o California Department of Transportation
o City of Signal Hill
o Long Beach Airport Department (City of Long Beach)
o Long Beach Water Department (City of Long Beach) – two separate comments
Final Program EIR/EIS and Response to Comments
18
CEQA/NEPA
• CEQA Requirement: CEQA requires decisionmakers to balance the benefits of the Proposed Project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, those effects may be considered “acceptable.” CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are infeasible to mitigate. The agency’s statement is referred to as a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
• Consideration in Support of the Statement of Overriding Considerationso Implements Guiding Principles and Objectives Established for the Proposed Project
o Aligns with City General Plan and Policies
o Generates Property Tax
o Generates Employment
o Improves Infrastructure
Statement of Overriding Considerations
19
Planning Commission Hearing on 12/17/20
• Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 17, 2020
• Hearing received significant public participation
• Comments were largely supportive, covered:o Open space connections
o Nature of Airport district
o Design of Wardlow Road cross-sections
o Parking requirements
o Office parking reduction
o Level of Service impacts at Wardlow Road and Cherry Avenue
o Height districts
o Permitted light industrial uses
o City of Signal Hill specifically commented on Draft EIR Responses to Comments, city staff worked with Signal Hill to address these
• Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend the City Council approve the project
20
Airport Land Use Commission Hearing 3/3/2021
• ALUC held a public hearing on March 3, 2021 and found the project consistent with the County’s Airport Land Use Plan
• ALUC made findings that the Specific Plan is consistent with the County’s Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) and will not create hazards or disincentives to airport operations, and that new or redeveloped land uses within the plan area will not be negatively affected by airport operations
• This step was required to take place between Planning Commission and City Council
Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC)
21
Other Agency Comments
• Signal Hill staff commented at Planning Commission on 12/17/20.o Expressed concerns over project Level of Service (LOS) impacts that would take place within
Signal Hill streets and intersections, and wording of Response to Comment 6-10 from the Final EIR/EIS.
o City of Long Beach engaged in a dialogue with Signal Hill staff to understand concerns, and revised Response to Comment 6-10 in the Final EIR/EIS to clarify.
• Signal Hill staff sent additional comments to Long Beach on 5/12/21 reiterating concerns.o Long Beach will commit to:
▪ Coordinate with Signal Hill on a project-specific basis through traffic assessments that will be conducted through the development review process; pay fair-share of EIR-established mitigations as appropriate.
▪ During project-level analysis, exploring additional transportation improvements that could take place within Signal Hill, within the framework of EIR-established mitigation measures.
▪ Continuing bike lanes from Long Beach into Signal Hill with Signal Hill’s permission.
City of Signal Hill
22
Recommendation
• Adopt a Resolution certifying the EIR/EIS, making findings of fact, adopting aStatement of Overriding Considerations, and approving a Mitigation Monitoringand Reporting Program,
• Adopt a Resolution adopting the Specific Plan pursuant to Sections 65450-65458of the California Government Code,
• Adopt a Resolution accepting the decision/action of the Los Angeles CountyAirport Land Use Commission relating to the Specific Plan,
• Declare an Ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code and repealingPD-13, relating to implementation of the Specific Plan, and
• Declare an Ordinance amending the Use District Map (Zoning Map), portions ofParts 16, 17, and 23, to reflect establishment of the Specific Plan.
23
Background
25
• 2013: US Dept. of Defense (DoD) notified Boeing there would be no future orders for C-17 Globemaster III military transport aircraft, manufactured at the Boeing facilities at 2400/2401 E. Wardlow Road in Long Beach.
• 2014: Boeing announced it would close C-17 plant by mid-2015.
• 2015: DoD terminated Boeing contract for C-17, and Boeing closed plant by end of year.
Existing Conditions
26
• Former C-17 site: 99 acres, 2400 and 2401 E. Wardlow Road, used as temporary storage and other temporary uses currently
• One large commercial shopping center
• Small light industrial uses
• Larger medium/general industrial uses
• Small retail uses
• Small commercial center
• Airport and aviation-related uses
• No residential
Parking Standards within the Specific Plan
• Parking follows regular Zoning Regulations requirements (Ch. 21.41) in most areas of the plan: CC, IC, IG, OS, and AP districts
• Parking in the BP (Business Park) district allows for economies of scale for large developments:o Office parking required at 2/1,000 sq. ft. instead of 4/1,000 sq. ft.
o Planning Commission may approve up to 35% parking reduction if Traffic Impact Analysis/Parking Management Study are provided
o TDMs for enhanced mobility and micro-mobility (on-campus) will be required
27
Planned Development Districts affected
28
• Western half of PD-19 (former C-17 facility location) will be absorbed into GCSP. Eastern half (former 717 facility, east of Lakewood Boulevard) will remain.
• All of PD-13 (Atlantic Aviation Center) will be absorbed into the GCSP’s Airport district.
Airport Compatibility
29
• Staff worked extensively with the Long Beach Airport to ensure the plan will further the Airport’s compliance with State and Federal regulations for aviation and airport-related land use planning
• Significant plan language was included to make areas of responsibility and review processes clear for airport-adjacent development
• Plan has been reviewed by the Airport Department’s legal counsel
VMT vs. LOS in EIR/EIS
• Level of Service (LOS) and vehicle delay are no longer considered an environmental impact under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as of July 1, 2020 under SB 743
• At the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published (September 12, 2018), LOS was the applicable metric for evaluating transportation and traffic impacts under CEQA
• The transportation analysis shown in the Traffic and Transportation section presents both the LOS metric and the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) metric for assessing transportation impacts per the requirements under CEQA
• The City of Long Beach Planning Commission approved CEQA Transportation Thresholds of Significance for City of Long Beach and Draft Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines to reflect the requirements per SB 743 on June 4, 2020
• The County of Los Angeles has not adopted new traffic impact study guidelines in accordance with SB 743
• Due to the timing of the NOP for this project in 2018, the existing and buildout LOS analysis is based on the City’s traffic study guidelines as adopted at the time of the NOP, which use LOS and delay
• The VMT analysis is also provided and is based on the City CEQA guidelines as a measure for significant transportation impacts under CEQA
VMT replaced LOS July 1, 2020
30
Issues Found to be Significant and Unavoidable: Air Quality
• This is a conservative analysis based on overlapping construction activities and full buildout over 20 years
• The Proposed Project would result exceed the SCAQMD construction thresholds for VOC and NOx and the SCAQMD operational thresholds for CO, VOC, and PM10, and VOC and PM10 are nonattainment pollutants under the NAAQS and/or CAAQS
• Reductions will be pursued regionally, statewide and nation-wide by SCAQMD, CARB and EPA
• The project includes construction equipment mitigation (Tier IV), idling restrictions, electric equipment, etc. Operational mitigation addresses reducing energy-related operational emissions, such as reducing diesel-fueled forklifts
• Further mitigation or regulation of these emissions is beyond the City’s jurisdiction
• Further reductions will require technological changes and regulatory changes from CARB and US EPA
• The Proposed Project would not exceed the demographic growth forecasts in the SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS and is consistent with the assumptions in the 2016 AQMP
Air Quality Plan
31
Issues Found to be Significant and Unavoidable: Air Quality
• This increase in employment in Long Beach is already captured in the basin-wide Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP/SCS) both of which obtain Clean Air Act Conformity Findings from US EPA
• Operational emissions are direct and indirect, including:• Area impacts (Natural Gas, Aerosols, Landscape Equipment)
• Transportation sources (full VMT)
• Energy consumption (power consumption, movement of water)
• Under the current model and conservative approach, the project is significant for construction emissions for VOC, and NOx
• Under the current model and conservative approach, the project is significant for operational emissions for VOC, CO, and PM10
• The project includes all available mitigations for energy-efficiency and VMT reduction strategies
Criteria Air Pollutants
32
Issues Found to be Significant and Unavoidable: Air Quality
• This is a conservative analysis based on overlapping construction activities and full buildout over 20 years
• This impact relates to temporary construction exposure of children, the elderly and other sensitive populations to air pollutants
• The analysis could not predict the exact timing or size of development, whether schools, day care and elder-care facilities will remain fixed in place over time or what future changes in construction equipment technology will occur
• Construction activities would generate NO2 (NOx), PM10, and PM2.5 emissions in excess of site-specific LSTs
• The most stringent SCAQMD localized criteria for SRA 4 was analyzed
• Mitigation measures for Construction Equipment Emissions Reductions and Fugitive Dust Control are incorporated in the project
Sensitive Receptors
33
Issues Found to be Significant and Unavoidable: Cultural Resources
• The plan area is presently developed with buildings that are over 50 years in age
• A list of potential historical resources was included in the MM-CUL-1 per input from local neighborhood groups
• Development under the proposed GCSP has a potential for demolishing structures that are eligible for historic significance. Preservation of historic-age buildings may not be feasible or consistent with the goals of the GCSP
• Mitigation measures incorporated in the project require future project proponents to ensure that potential impacts to historical resources be assessed at the project level
• In the event, a future development proposal could result in the demolition of a historical resource, the inclusion of mitigation measures will ensure proper recordation of historic properties
Historical Resources
34
Issues Found to be Significant and Unavoidable
• Construction of the Proposed Project is assumed to last a total of approximately 20 years
• The Proposed Project’s service population, which is defined as residents plus employees, consists solely of employees as the Proposed Project does not include a residential land use component
• The estimated total GHG emissions during construction of would total approximately 28,492 MT CO2e over the assumed 20-year construction period. Estimated Proposed Project-generated construction emissions amortized over 30 years would be approximately 950 MT CO2e per year
• After accounting for amortized Proposed Project construction emissions, total net GHGs generated by the Proposed Project would be approximately 64,166 MT CO2e per year
• The Proposed Project is estimated to result in 5.74 MT CO2e/SP/year (64,166 MT CO2e/year ÷11,170 SP), which would exceed the applied efficiency metric threshold 1.92 MT CO2e/SP/year
• The project does include all available mitigation measures to reduce travel (VMT) and increase energy efficiency
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)
35
Issues Found to be Significant and Unavoidable
• The total net Proposed Project emissions (after subtracting emissions associated with the existing land uses), including operation and amortized construction, would be approximately 64,166 MT CO2e per year, resulting in 5.74 MT CO2e/SP/year, which would exceed the applied efficiency metric threshold 1.92 MT CO2e/SP/year for 2040
• The project does include all available mitigation measures to reduce travel (VMT) and increase energy efficiency
• Once the CAAP is formally adopted, future projects under the GCSP would be required to include a project-level analysis demonstrating consistency with the goals, policies, and standards established under the CAAP
GHG Emissions: GHG Reduction Plan, Policy, Regulations
36
Issues Found to be Significant and Unavoidable: Transportation
• Six (6) key study intersections were estimated to operate at deficient LOS under Existing (2018) plus Project conditions
• Ten (10) key intersections were estimated to operate at deficient LOS during Year 2040 plus Project conditions
• Mitigation Measures were identified for each identified impact
• When the proposed improvements would fall under the authority of another jurisdiction or require additional right-of-way acquisition causing operational deficiencies or conflicts with the intent of the specific plan. All identified mitigation measures were determined to be infeasible, therefore, all impacts related to consistency with established LOS metrics are considered significant and unavoidable
• A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) shall be prepared during the entitlement process for future subsequent projects under the GCSP. The project-specific TIA shall identify potential operational impacts under the methodology established by the Department of Public Works. If VMT or level of service inconsistencies are identified, the Project Applicant shall be responsible for implementing mitigation measures, as feasible. All applicable improvement measures shall have a nexus and proportionality to the operational impacts identified at the project-level
Circulation Plan, Ordinance, Policy
37